The Prime Minister looked a bit frustrated. He had concluded his prepared remarks and invited questions and now various members of the mob before him were shouting various queries in his general direction. This was not as Mr. Harper prefers it. No, when Mr. Harper has his way, those who wish to ask a question of him are to present themselves to a member of his staff beforehand. Once the Prime Minister is ready to entertain other voices, a member of his staff then calls on the questioners by name and employer. After the Prime Minister has finished responding, the next questioner is called by name and employer. No follow-ups are permitted.

Here the woman from the Prime Minister’s Office called out the name of the journalist assigned the first question, but the mob was unwilling to cooperate. Amid the shouting, she called out again, to no effect. The Prime Minister seemed at a loss, obviously unused to being treated like a common politician. Eventually, after a few uncomfortable seconds, he pointed in the direction of a TV newsman to his immediate right. After a perfunctory response, the shouting returned. Mr. Harper managed to point out a francophone voice in the crowd. Another question, another response and then he turned on his heels and took his leave.

It is rare to see the Prime Minister without control. And it is obvious the Prime Minister does not much enjoy the feeling.

“Our economy is not a political game,” he had lamented upon arriving at the podium set up for him in the foyer of the House of Commons. “The global recovery is still fragile. Relative to other nations, Canada’s economic recovery has been strong but its continuation is by no means assured. Many threats remain.”

Indeed, the threats are apparently legion, from “turmoil in the Middle East” and “disaster in Japan” to “European debt” and “global economic uncertainty.” All are well beyond Mr. Harper’s control (and responsibility, mind you) and all are imperilling the economic recovery on which his government has spent all its precious time.

“The budget that the Minister of Finance tabled yesterday, the next phase of Canada’s Economic Action Plan, is a low tax plan of critical importance to jobs, growth and the financial security of hardworking Canadians,” he raved, holding the budget book up for the cameras like a Price is Right spokesmodel. “It is unfortunate for Canadians that the Liberals, NDP and Bloc Québécois seem to have a different priority and that is to force an unnecessary election.”

When he’s not precipitating elections—in 2005 it was Mr. Harper’s motion of non-confidence that upended the Liberal government and in 2008 it was Mr. Harper who asked the Governor General to dissolve Parliament—Mr. Harper is fond of lamenting how unnecessary and reckless they are. Mind you, if his fixed election date law had been worth more than the paper required to print it, the country would be compelled to conduct an election every four years, no matter what international calamities were occurring at the time.

Perhaps Mr. Harper wishes elections would simply come when properly called upon by a member of his staff. Perhaps he wishes people would just listen. “From coast to coast to coast,” he said, “Canadians expect all parliamentarians to be working together to finish the job of securing our economic future.”

Of course, by “working together,” the Prime Minister seemed to mean “voting together,” namely in support of Mr. Harper’s budget. “Let me be very clear,” he clarified. “This budget, the next phase of Canada’s Economic Action Plan is designed to ensure the continuation of Canada’s recovery. The opposition parties have a choice between two priorities—their ambition for an unnecessary election or our important measures to support Canadians and the economy.”

But however unreliable and selfish those conspiring opposition parties, Mr. Harper had not lost hope in their ability to capitulate. “Notwithstanding their declarations,” he said, “the opposition parties still have the opportunity to put Canadians’ interests first.”

All this invoking of “Canadians” and “Canada’s Economic Action Plan” and “Canadians’ interests,” might’ve seemed more selfless if the distinction between the country and the current Prime Minister hadn’t already been officially deleted.

A short while after Mr. Harper had managed to take two questions from the mob, it was Michael Ignatieff’s turn to face the TV lights. Flanked by a dozen Liberal MPs, he seemed altogether enthusiastic. “This is where you come to choice time,” he announced after once again declaring his dissatisfaction with the government’s budgetary abilities. “You can have those Conservative priorities or you can have compassionate, responsible Liberal ones. Those are the choices.”

But if Mr. Harper was still focused on the choices of the opposition parties, Mr. Ignatieff was apparently already looking past the 40th Parliament. “We believe that the moment has come for Canadians to make a choice here,” he said.

And so they soon will. The control is about to be taken away from these two men and this place and bestowed upon whoever wishes to exercise it.

Harper thinks that we will be having an unnecessary election because we are supposedly in an economic recovery. What happens if we wait until Harper's fixed election date and we are still in a economic recovery phase? Do we delay the election forever?

If one even tries to make sense of this need to be careful, cautious and prudent in these perilous times meme then perhaps we should look at the very recent action by the PM to commit our forces to Libya. (A decision, I agree with btw)

Still, does anyone know where to look in the budget for the line item that accounts for such an expense? I mean if this is the government to see us through what is coming, should they not have fiscally accounted for the incremental cost of this major operation they just decided to join? Should they not have a contingency for the next one?

Never mind that Ignatieff answered one of the questions by stating that the Conservatives have spent less on "senior citizens in a year than has been spent on the G-20 summit in one day."

For you infomation, Mr.Wherry, Mr.Ignatieff told us a lie. It is not true what he said. In fact, he should have said 'additional spending on senior citizens….."

Did you, or anyone else, question Mr.Ignatieff on that statement, taking into consideration that Ignatieff is fully in favour of follow-up questions??

Or did no one from the media feel the need to question the incorrect statement Mr.Ignatieff had just made? Are you not concerned when a Libeal leader tries to stand tall by defending the state of our democracy and then tells an outright lie?

Ah, I think I know your problem. It isn't Wherry's glasses but your own. You must be wearing the "Conservative" glasses that I have seen most people wearing out here in the west. Let me guess, you are probably from Alberta. They have been wearing them here for the last 40 years or so, and most have a hard time seeing anything without them on.

Darn right he looked enthusiastic. Who wouldn't? He has something to look forward to. He was thinking about how well the media had served Stockwell Day by singing along with Doris Day, and so now Michael's turn has come.

The Prime Minister attends these media events by way of hologram. Today represented a Canadian technological first in that a Prime Ministerial Hologram took TWO questions. Never before has this nation's most senior and powerful Hologram taken questions.

If voters are lucky, they may benefit from additional holographic meetings with The Prime Minister during the upcoming unnecessary campaign.

About as many journalists as those who questioned Flaherty after he said that the opposition demanded massive tax increases and a carbon tax leading up the budget in his address in the House of Commons…

OH WAIT, sorry, I'm screwing with the whole 'lefty media' thing you guys rely on so damn much. Must be nice to have a catch-all excuse to explain away everything you don't like. Convenient as hell.

And so, back in 2008, after Jack had agreed to join the coalition and to agree to the Liberal corporate tax cuts, one of his most western NDP MP's was still confused. And so Jack said:

"What? What are you still confused about? We get the coalition. What's not to like?"

"Well" so said the most western NDP MP in question, "Why would we overthrow the Conservatives if they are also for the tax cuts, just like the Liberals are . Now we join the Liberals in the forming of a coalition by agreeing to the tax cuts, but we must overthrow the Conservatives first because they are in favour of the very same tax cuts??How does this work, Leader Layton? "

So, approximately 28 minutes after Franciene calls Ignatieff a liar for not including the words "the additional" in his off the cuff response to a question, she starts a written post with "Overheard just a few months ago during a Liberal caucus meeting:" and completely lies with every word thereafter. Come to think of it, since this wasn't something overheard at all, the entire post was a lie. And she had the time to think about it.

But I like Duceppe the best when it comes to understanding how surreal Canadian politics has become (and I'm not making this up; you can backtrack Evan in conversation with Duceppe on March 22, 2011)

Duceppe was questioned by Evan by him saying that in a sense Duceppe had an advantage for only having to campaign in the province of Quebec, and that all other party leaders will have to cover the entire country.

But not so, said Duceppe. It could be seen as a disadvantage for him, because he doesn't have the distance to travel, you see, and he has to engage with voters all the time, while the other leaders can spend some time in an airplane or bus, you see………….

Duceppe is at a disadvantage during Canadian 'federal' campaigns.

I love it how the media has no come back to that sort of answers given by Duceppe.

David Suzuki, sound-alike does Tory ad?
Has anyone noticed that the narrator of a "tough on illegal immigrants" ad, picturing a boatload of regugees, sounds a lot like David Suzuki. Co-incident? I doubt it.

(Tip to Evan Solomon: next time Duceppe takes over your show, let him know that the federal party leaders need extra time spent on buses and airplanes just to be able to collect their thoughts for keeping up with the various complex issues facing this entire country.)

My books have a little thing on the first page that says "This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places and incidents are either the product of the authors' imagination or are used fictitiously, and any resemblance to actual persons living or dead, business establishments, events, or locales, is entirely coincidental."

Admittedly, this would tend to kill any humour you were trying to get across with your post, but maybe you could have shortened it, and put it at the end.

And, am I spelling it wrong? I remember it wasn't Francine, but it was similar. Two n's?

"OH WAIT, sorry, I'm screwing with the whole 'lefty media' thing you guys rely on so damn much. Must be nice to have a catch-all excuse to explain away everything you don't like. Convenient as hell."

The fun part will be when SunTV launches; their own very existence will require them to work overtime to drive the whole "lefty media" thing, just to maintain their own positioning as lone speakers-of-truth and underdog victims. An immunity to cognitive dissonance will be a job requirement.

I'm assuming, of course, that the whole 'Fox News North' approach comes to pass (hiring Ezra F'ing Levant is an ominous sign). I hope to be proven wrong.

Something interesting to note to you, Jenn. Coyne just let it be known that Ignatieff is quite the story teller (when he gets going, or so Coyne said – see video Coyne/Wells)

Well, now it must all make sense when listening to Ignatieff. Perhaps he's like me, thinking that he doesn't need to notify the public when he talking fiction or none-fiction. Ooops, I think we have a problem. If you, as a writer, cannot distinguish between fiction and none-fiction when reading my posts, how will the voter be able to tell whether Ignatieff, the story teller, is talking fiction or none-fiction?

Would you be so kind and alert the voter when Ignatieff tells fiction un-announced? :)

The whole five years of Harper's excuse of a government is that it's been nothing but a game to him. Just the sight of those stupid rah rah siss boom bah "Economic Action Plan" signs is a glaring reminder of the *Game*.

He's been playing us like cheap fiddles.

Oh, and two thumbs up to Mr. Jack Layton for not biting the poisoned apple. May he get well quick–and stay well.

Restoring accountability will be one of the major priorities of our new government. Accountability is what ordinary Canadians, working Canadians, those people who pay their bills, pay their taxes, expect from their political leaders

Thank you for the name correction. I did not mis-spell it on purpose, as to make fun or anything. I shall endeavour to remember it is sans an e.

I think Coyne is great, although I disagree with him frequently. However, I try not to blindly take the word of anyone (Coyne, Ignatieff, you, anybody) without something to back it up. Sometimes that something is my own impression of the matter, which is dangerous, I admit. Still, I try. So I'll wait to see Ignatieff go into fictional story-telling myself instead of just taking your word of Coyne's word for it. And if I ever do see it, I promise to post an alert here. But it has to be a whole story, not omitting two words which would be generally understood by the audience, in an off the cuff response to a question.

I'm picturing chet and FVerhoeven in the same basement suite. Every so often chet pulls out of his drunken stupor long enough to type a few sentences, then collapses on the ratty old couch again, while FVerhoeven bounces off a few walls, then types furiously, then starts doing jumping jacks.

Jenn, I haven't been completely honest with you: I am also working on my thesis.
The title of my thesis shall be: Beware: from Dippers to Drippers.

You see, I will try and prove that an omission or two here, and an addition or two there – one drip here and another drip there – will add up to a complete change, but a complete change unnoticed. Unnoticed is the key word here, but you understood that, right Jenn?

Such is the power of the drip. And so, while our old instincts may still be on the lookout for the dangers as being presented by the Dippers (duh!), we must now be on the look out for the Drippers.

There's not a joy the world can give that it takes away
When the glow of early thought declines in feeling's dull decay,
'Tis not on youth's smooth cheek the blush alone, which fades so fast,
But the tender bloom of heart is gone, ere youth itself be past."

If our economy is not a political game, Mr. Harper, then why are you playing politics with it ? … You are the one who is saying my budget and only my budget my way … and if y'all don't like it, go hang … brinksmanship, sounds like a political game to me.

"Michael Ignatieff is the scion of two distinguished families. He is grandson of Count Paul Ignatieff, Imperial Russia's last minister of education, and Princess Natalie Mestchersky. Through his mother, Alison, he is a descendent of two principals of UPPER CANADA COLLEGE (grandfather William Lawson Grant and great-grandfather George PARKIN) and one principal of Queen's University (great-grandfather George Monro GRANT). Philosopher George Parkin GRANT was his uncle.
Ignatieff's early childhood was spent in New York, Washington, Belgrade, and London, the capitals where his father, Canadian diplomat George IGNATIEFF, was posted. The young Ignatieff completed his secondary schooling at Upper Canada College "http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?…

The Ignatieffs were powerful players in the czar's dictatorship. When the Russian revolution succeeded, the Ignatieffs fled the country.

But like so many, they were able to squirrel away money. The Ignatieffs fled to London in 1919, where they had
£
25,000 waiting for them in a bank. That's worth more than $2 million in today's currency.

"Later, he would advance to work on the company's computer systems. He took up post-secondary studies again at the University of Calgary, where he completed a bachelor's degree in economics. He later returned there to earn a master's degree in economics, completed in 1993."

In Liberal partisan land, calling Count Ignatieff of Russian Royalty, wealthy gentlemen and world travelling diplomat a "poor immigrant" is equivalent of calling Harper, who was an economist….an economist.

Well, I live in Calgary and I have no problem seeing things as clearly as Wherry does. Neither do several other people that I know here – in smaller towns. Seems like the tip of the Titanic's iceberg to me.

This is hilarious the media in the Ottawa bubble doing its job? What kind of a world do you live in?
Thank God for the Net. The Boonies are available there 24/7 in every part of the country. Especially the talk shows and as Don Martin said this evening – they often can give you a better feel for what's happening across the country than the Lame Stream Media. You want to know what's really happening across the country? Google! It will surprise you because it's not the crap you get on here.

To freely admit that is a always good thing: I'm free, that's all that counts, Jenn, really.

But didn't you come to same conclusion the last time we had a more-than-one-posting-interaction? I believe the conversation then was all about reason and emotions. I would love to pick up on that old conversation with you. Specially tied into politics and all…..

Here's another one – how many times has HarperCo championed the 'hard working, taxpaying citizens' who he claims to represent. I am reading tonight that Bruce Carson is what I would generously describe as a person who seems to habitually be trying to avoid paying his taxes.(legally or illegally). How did he get anywhere near the PMO.
*this is of course separate and apart from all this 'Envirnment Ministry 'adviser' stuff.

Talk shows will tell you what the demographic that listens to talk shows is thinking. You'd probably get a better feel for what's actually happening across the country by sticking your head in a toilet and pulling the handle.

Gayle that is remarkably unfair. Stephen Harper is simply taking a page from US presidents (both flavours), in which it is recognized that giving good answers is very important, yet challenging. As a result, considerable time and effort is put into formulating the correct answers. Even the delivery, down to shrugs and hand chops are considered crucial in getting a precise answer conveyed accurately to the public. Our PM takes his responsibility for providing those answers so seriously that he has been known to practice in front of a mirror for hours. This has caused him to be late for some photo-ops and led to some good-natured kidding from his international counterparts, but SH takes that in stride as part of the cost of doing the job well. So as you can now see, with so much effort going into the answer, it is completely irresponsible for the press to ask the wrong question.

you forgot the part where everyone laughed, because Duceppe was making a joke, and not a bad joke at that. We can probably agree that the economy is not a political game, but that doesn't mean that political games shouldn't be fun from time to time.

From my experience, screening is done only to ensure that you actually have a point to make, not to screen out any particular point of view. Talk shows thrive on controversy so there is no advantage to the radio station in screening out a less popular point of view. Quite the opposite.

My point is that people who phone talk shows are simply people who want to express an opinion to a wider audience than just their own spouses, offspring and pets. Same as you, me, Thwim and the rest of the tweeting, blogging and social media pundits.

Watch a debate with Duceppe and the other leaders. He routinely mops the floor with all of them. In English! The guy is probably smarter than Harper, Ignatief, and Layton combined. It is a shame all of his intelligence is being wasted in a regional separatist party.

I am in the west as well…..but unless something really strange happens ..it will go Conservative….however I have heard several folks at work and at the coffe shop say they plan on staying home…that there is nobody to vote for…interesting

Check out the New York Times policy on anoymous sources. Would totally change political reporting in Canada if the major publications (ahem, Jane Taber G&M) even held themselves to half of this standard.http://www.nytco.com/company/business_units/sourc…

Even if that was at all relevant to my point, which — as I didn't mention internet commenting as being in any way superior — it wasn't, it's demonstrably untrue, because the bulk of talk-shows are populated by males of the "middle-age and above" demographic — and almost exclusionary to any others. Don't just believe me though.. go ahead and check demographic reports on media consumption.

Sure, the theory is they could be populated by anybody. The reality is that they aren't.

The internet has a larger swing toward youth, true, but the bias is far less prevalent, and getting less so as the technologies become more pervasive and less complex.

That aside.. even if we ignore the facts and just go with your statement. Is there any particular reason why you feel the opinion of meeker people is not relevant?

In SK, when the current conservative government got in, they made a few mistakes. One of them was sending an email notice to the U of Regina's School of Journalism asking for the names of people who would like to let their names stand on newspaper letters to the editor and for call-in radio talk shows.

It's obvious that people here deliver government talking points, and they do it for talk shows and print media too. Everyone on here is not a real person and not necessarily posting their own ideas. It's up to all of us to try to separate the real comments and ideas from the propaganda.

And it was bloody obvious that Minister Oda had made an honest mistake. And it was bloody obvious that she had apologized for any misgivings she might have caused. And it had been bloody obvious to CIDA what Minister Oda had intended when inserting the 'not' – CIDA has said so itself!! CIDA understood what Minister Oda had signed off on – It had been the opposition parties who wanted to fabricate another story.

Has that been bloody obvious to you?

And its bloody obvious that Pat Martin wanted desparately to have a preordained answer out of Minister Oda, one he couldn't get even though he tried bullying, and bullying and bullying. And then bullied some more.

If you are proud of NDP Pat Martin and his bullying tactics, go for it!

Is there any particular reason why you feel the opinion of meeker people is not relevant?

Hardly. I myself am one of those meeker people and I obviously feel that my opinion is a national treasure on the order of Algonquin Park or the Grand Banks of Newfoundland.

But your argument seems to have shifted from the scatological to the merely demographic all of a sudden. Are phone-in callers filthy and stupid based only on their age and gender? Or is there something more elemental that makes them untrustworthy?

And I suppose that you believe that Fox News is "fair and balanced" as well. :p I know that if you say something long enough some people will start to believe it, but you Conservatives think that if you tell the same lie over and over it will become true!

I never, ever watch Fox news because I hear it doesn't talk about Canadian politics. I like to discuss Canadian politics.

But if you can bring forth another argument, you know, like a valid one, I would like to hear it. I would like to discuss Canadian politics. I will tell you over and over again that I would like to discuss Canadian politics. If that sounds like a lie to you, than go on believing the lies. Eat 'm up. Swallow it.

I think the metaphors you choose actually reveal a lot about your attitudes. As such, I was taken aback at your hostility towards phone-callers and I only intervened to point out that people like them are really quite similar to people like us.

I don't wanna hector you or anything, but your defensiveness about the thing is just kind of interesting. If you don't wanna talk about it, that's okay.

In 2008 Harper asked the Governor General to dissolve Parliament and call an election just when it was obvious to everyone with any economic sense we were in a recession and government was needed tor react properly. Now that Harper claims the recession is basically over in Canada, Harper claims it would be reckless and destabilizing to call an election.

It is this Prime Minister who is reckless and unstable, not the opposition or the electorate.

Ah, I get it. Every country in the world is seriously affected by global economic uncertainty. So, according to Mr. Harper all democratic elections in every country should be suspended until Mr. Harper gives us the "all clear," if we extend his reasoning. This is the claim made by every despot in history who has seized power in a previously democratic country.

âThe budget that the Minister of Finance tabled yesterday, the next phase of Canadaâs Economic Action Plan, is a low tax plan of critical importance to jobs, growth and the financial security of hardworking Canadians,â he raved,…

Funny how tories always say the opposite of the truth. The Canadian press is owned and controlled by tory business and any educated, plugged in Canadian can easily see that. We know that you continually say the press in not on your side (a bad ploy) but if the Canadian press were any further up the tories behinds they would see ATVs news anchore Steve Murphy's feet! For instance the CTV network or Conservative Television Network have more Senators than any other company in Canada. Pam Whalin? Mike Duffy, Minister Bev Oda and if thats not enought to convince the Canadian voters that our press is controlled by tory business did you ever ask yourself how Ben Mulruiny got his CTV job! I will end with this "the CTV reporters do not aspire to be great reporters, they aspire to be Senators!
PS. Why do you think Tories want to kill CBC? Its the only press they dont own!

Its not the reporters its the media owners. The reporters are just there to collect data and then the owner controlled editors spin it and publishes it or not. Sad things is that most reporters dont realize this and really think they matter. What a sorry state we are in…

Notice: Your email may not yet have been verified. Please check your email, click the link to verify your address, and then submit your comment. If you can't find this email, access your profile editor to re-send the confirmation email. You must have a verified email to submit a comment. Once you have done so, check again.

Sign In / Sign Up

With your existing account from

With an email account

Commenters who signed up before June 26th, 2014 will have to reregister on our new, social-friendly login system. The good news? The process should only take a few minutes, and you're welcome to use the same email address.

Almost Done!

Please confirm the information below before signing up.

{* #socialRegistrationForm *}
{* socialRegistration_firstName *}
{* socialRegistration_lastName *}
{* socialRegistration_emailAddress *}
{* socialRegistration_displayName *}
By clicking "Create Account", I confirm that I have read and understood each of the website terms of service and privacy policy and that I agree to be bound by them.